House Republicans suggested Friday a new plan to help fight America's debt and it includes passing a budget for the first time in years, Fox News reported, by lawmakers on both sides are in disagreement, saying it goes against the 27th Amendment, the newest key figure in the Washington battle.

The 27th Amendment of the Constitution, which states that a sitting Congress cannot change its pay while in session, is in the middle of debt-crisis talks in Washington.

GOP leaders gave an ultimatum in an effort to break the deadlock and to push the Democrat-controlled Senate to take action. The plan, called "no budget, no pay," allows the government to get three additional months of borrowing authority with no spending cuts required, in change for having to pass a budget at the same time. If senators fail to pass a budget by the end of the three months, they will be denied their federal paychecks, the news report explained.

The payroll administration would withhold Congress' paycheck after April 15, 2013, if it could not agree on a fiscal year 2014 budget, according to section 2 of the bill. The money would be given back to Congress members when a budget was passed or at the end of the current 113th Congress in Jan. 1, 2015. In exchange, Congress would hold the debt ceiling until May 18, 2013.

House Speaker John Boehner called the failure to pass any kind of budget over the past four years "shameful," but the proposed bill - published on Monday- is drawing criticism by both Republicans and democrats. The provision on pay allegedly goes against the Constitution's 27th Amendment.

Approved in 1992, it reads, "No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened." The amendment was first proposed in 1789 by James Madison but it took 203 years for it to become part of the Constitution, according to Yahoo! In 1992, Alabama became the 38th state to sign off on it, making it the law.

"I understand the sentiment behind 'no budget, no pay,' [but] it appears that the 27th Amendment does not permit Congress to alter its pay in the midst of a current session," Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., said Monday. "We just started the 113th Congress, effectively meaning that we would not be able to alter our pay or wouldn't be able to take effect until 2015. Even if this was presented, it would render it meaningless in terms of the effect it's intended to have."

House Oversight Committee chair and Republican Darrell Issa initially said he thought the bill was unconstitutional, according to a report published Friday by Roll Call. But his office then issued a statement, saying that "the final proposal brought before the House will have resolved any constitutional questions and that it will have my support."

A GOP leadership aide told Fox News that the proposed pill does not go against the constitution because it suggests to temporarily withhold pay, as opposed to reducing pay of Congress members.